Will EV's make electricity expensive? Need good answer.

[Texas-Mark]

but the average power consumption per EV per unit of time x the number of EVs is exactly the figure to use.

And the cost of upgrades to pass on to everyone else.

 

[Short_Shot]

If I have 2 EVs to charge I do not care at all who drives how far.

All I care about is the total power I need to generate to satisfy the power requirements of the EVs. I don't even really care about load requirements assuming I can meet the needs and *average out* the draw somehow.

To that end I do not need to know if Jim uses 50kwh every day and Tim uses 500kwh every day. I just need to ensure that 550kwh is available to their system.

So when dealing with a population and using averages:
The average figure between the two is 275kwh.

I have two people.

That's 550kwh.

That is the known required demand for both people despite having gotten to the number a different way without knowing any details about who drives how much.

 

[Short_Shot]

And the cost of upgrades to pass on to everyone else.

Of course.

But the point I made earlier is that the infrastructure doesn't need all that much upgrading as a whole because the projected increase by 2040 is still only 5% of the total power needs of the planet.

The grid already largely has that overhead available today.

 

[Texas-Mark]

The grid already largely has that overhead available today.

I disagree that today's grid is ready for a 5% across the board increase. It can barely keep up with other increasing demands.

 

[Short_Shot]

I disagree that today's grid is ready for a 5% across the board increase. It can barely keep up with other increasing demands.

That's largely a matter of slow response to changing loads which is a very complicated topic, rather than ability to carry the power in the first place.

 

[Hedges]

It just means you have above average usage. Where you drive 50 miles a day I probably average less than 10 and that's including the few times a year where I'll drive a thousand miles on a weekend. I live 1.5 miles from work, my bank, and the grocery store I shop at. All virtually on the same corner lol

Ride a bike?

Overall load on the grid from EV would relate to (mean) average miles driven. Average within an area fed by a substation will matter too.

People driving infrequently and short distances can continue driving existing ICE vehicles with little fossil fuel, carbon dioxide, etc. contribution. No reason to tie up limited resources and manufacturing to change them.

A large number of people drive distances within EV range most of the time. Some might want pure EV, some might want hybrid to reduce operating cost but be able to travel distances without buying a second car.

For those who drive more than 50, 150, whatever distance exceeds range of some batteries, options include more expensive EV with long range, and hybrid. Also ICE of course. If 80% or so of miles are electric, could save a considerable amount on fuel cost with plug-in hybrid. It is a better value for them than for someone who only drives 10 miles a day and may never save enough on gas to pay for the batteries.

California has crippled some plug-in hybrids by giving large cash incentives to manufacturers in exchange for making the ICE operation of plug-in hybrids barely usable. Having ICE backup with good range is a way to make them meet the needs of all buyers, reduces the amount of lithium needed per car, and making price competitive. I think a plug-in hybrid with long ICE range is the best way to reduce fossil fuel consumption by the greatest amount in the short term. There is only one problem with it: people flocked to buy Tesla but not Volt. Maybe for a price in the $15k to $20k range instead of $35k, that would change.

 

[Hedges]

I disagree that today's grid is ready for a 5% across the board increase. It can barely keep up with other increasing demands.

Might be able to deliver 5% more kWh, so long as timing of loads turning on/off can be controlled to fill in valleys and shave peaks.

This doesn't require continuously variable or real-time control. Broadcast of target statistics for on vs. off percentage of time (within a geographical region) could be performed periodically. Like a pager message every 15 minutes or hour. Each charger (or AC power cord with relay) would use its own random number generator to decide when to enable its allotted "on" time. With thousands of such devices, this provides continuously variable power consumption.

That would be the easiest way to deploy control of demand. It would work for A/C as well. Simpler version interrupts the 24V control signal to compressor, preferred is to adjust thermostat setting. This alone would probably eliminate virtually all incidents of grid collapsing due to excess demand in the summer.

 

[time2roll]

I wonder if all had the same concerns in the 1950s and 1960s when air conditioning was expanding rapidly?
With technology we have today, any needed expansion should be simple to execute.

 

[Short_Shot]

There may be an initial increase then as supply catches up it can come back down. Nothing really to worry about.

 

[Hedges]

I wonder if all had the same concerns in the 1950s and 1960s when air conditioning was expanding rapidly?
With technology we have today, any needed expansion should be simple to execute.

Back then it was an opportunity, not a concern.

 

[time2roll]

Yes, the same opportunity for this is today. These are the things that will make America great.

 

[Hedges]

Back then, PG&E was in the power business.
They could build more power plants to support more customers, grow, make more money.

Then in the 90's and 2000's, the government forced them to sell power plants and buy power through a bidding scheme. In the name of "competition".
Each supplier seeks to maximize profit, which they can do by fully utilizing their plants and selling 100% of power that can be produced.

There is no profit in spending money for excess capacity to cover peak foreseeable demand. Or hardening against freak weather conditions. Just ask Texas.

 

[MattiFin]

The Tesla charger at $415/9.6kW is a bargain.

Level 2 AC "charger" is just glorified contactor and supervisory circuit. The cable itself is probably more than 50% of BOM.
Basically extension cord with GFCI
Charger part is actually inside the cars and the "wall box" supplies AC power trough contactor/relays.
I Could bodge my own 3-phase 22kW level 2 "charger" from junk box parts for free in a hour or two..

 

[12VoltInstalls]

So a 120v 20A circuit can get most cars charged overnight. Solar would just require you to push power onto the grid during day and pulling it off at night. Not such a terrible thing.

Until “everyone“ is plugging in overnight. Somewhere locally or at the grid level batteries are needed if grid input is solar-heavy.

 

[12VoltInstalls]

The EV will pay for the additional electricity needed from the grid.
The cost to charge at home can be half compared to gasoline.

At (locally) $.16/kWh and .3kWh/mile that makes EV roughly 1/2 as expensive as gasoline with the current inflated gasoline costs.
Granted those gasoline costs a ‘false’ due to the conditions that precipitated the rise in gas prices, but they are what they are.

Unless the current administration takes ownership of the situations that are influencing non-gasoline inflation and curtails it, the carter-like inflation will result in electricity costs rising as it will take more dollars for the same electricity value. That’s one unsurety.
Another impact is the cost to purchase an EV; lower cost of operating per mile is only one factor. If the purchase price is $10K, $20K, $30K more than the aged cost of purchase plus gasoline, Julia Q Public can’t all participate easily. In the scenario The Demand For Gas remains and the least likely demographic to afford an EV effectively foots the bill. The more well-heeled get the benefit, not the majority tax payer.

That’s just my view. I’m not opposed to EV, support the idea; we need to plan as a society so that we not only achieve the ‘green’ goals, but that we don’t either indirectly subsidize the well-er-off folks who can afford it or create a situation where ‘the masses’ have to be directly subsidized to have transportation.

There’s a saw in churches that says in part don’t be so heavenly minded you are of no earthly good.
Along that line- shutting down pipelines and creating other economic pressure to expedite EV transition- we can’t be so environmentally minded that the ‘suffering’ we aim to mitigate (energy, global crises) isn’t merely exchanged for broad-based economic hardship for middle America and rural citizens.

 

[Steve_S]

I've gone through this tread and saw something completely missed - surprisingly.
Pertaining to Post 1 Question.
It appears that people feel that only Tesla is offering EV+Resdidential Solar Installs, sorry not the case and it's about to get much different as well. Hyundai/Kia have announced the Home Eco System which can be bundled with next years models of their EV https://www.hyundaiusa.com/us/en/hyundai-home This will also enable many more people to deploy & use solar and access rebates etc...
Others are also headed this way, VW is pondering/percolating such options as well. They will not be the only ones.

Even more tied into this, is EV Chargers with Vanadium Flow Cells charged by solar are in test & outperforming expectations (Australia leading here, imagine that) but it does not stop there... Residential & Off-Grid Vanadium Flow cells are OUT - The Picture we see TODAY is changing and faster than some want to accept or realize. BTW The Flow Cell tech is Safe, Non-Toxic and CHEAPER the Lithium etc... as this tech grows out that will improve as well.

VSUN tests flow battery technology with standalone PV-powered EV charger

Australian energy storage company VSUN Energy claims to have identified the ‘missing piece of the renewable energy jigsaw’ after successfully testing a standalone electric vehicle battery charger using solar PV supplied by a vanadium redox flow battery.

www.pv-magazine.com

So the question of Will EV's make electricity more expensive, there are many things coming to offset such but it will need coordination & cooperation and THAT will be the hurdle to cross. Everyone demands their pie exclusively.

 

[curiouscarbon]

a 120V 10A connection is able to serve 90% of my day to day battery only driving needs from a night of charging. that’s a constant ~1,000 W give or take while charging, so like roughly the scale of an electric tea kettle is how i think of it. 240V 12A has worked great in the past as well, even more flexibility at ~3,000W

people use air conditioning pretty frequently in lots of areas, and those devices can use up to 10,000 to 20,000W from what i gather, at the high end for residential at least. and some places people run it for a number of hours. and now there are programs that allow power supplier to delay air conditioning during peak consumption.

would be cool if some electric vehicle AC chargers could detect line frequency and adjust charging rate according to a configurable function, to peak shave for happy grid. charge slower when the grid is low supply condition

every day long commute with battery only electric vehicle is not something i consider to be super viable in usa yet. but it’s getting better. charging stations at parking lots etc. but usually less than 1/10th the spots. multiple charging plug standards. different charging rates, it increases the complexity of logistics.

lots of use cases are poorly suited to full electric at this time imo. to the extent that adoption is slow, that gives plenty of time and motivation to country build at home! new grid timee

 

[curiouscarbon]

California has crippled some plug-in hybrids by giving large cash incentives to manufacturers in exchange for making the ICE operation of plug-in hybrids barely usable. Having ICE backup with good range is a way to make them meet the needs of all buyers, reduces the amount of lithium needed per car, and making price competitive. I think a plug-in hybrid with long ICE range is the best way to reduce fossil fuel consumption by the greatest amount in the short term. There is only one problem with it: people flocked to buy Tesla but not Volt. Maybe for a price in the $15k to $20k range instead of $35k, that would change.

over the years, the trade off of whether to completely avoid or allow ICE to directly drive the wheels has crossed my mind and visit each side of the fence.

personally, at this point, if it’s going to burn fuel, i want it to be purely to generate electricity and it runs at a happy efficiency band basically always. the importance of the principle of operation to me justifies a higher price for the specific design requirements.

all the complexity in the drivetrain leads to labor and material costs and poor performance. some electric only drivetrains are proving to be quite reliable. slap an oil filter on a double herringbone single gear and cool it, that’s one option.

These units are connected via a planetary gear and three electrically controlled hydraulic clutches to provide power output for propulsion in any of four programmed operating modes:[75]

1. Single-motor electric – The primary motor runs solely on battery power, maximum propulsion power is 111 kW.
2. Dual-motor electric – At higher vehicle speeds the secondary motor engages over the planetary gear such that it reduces the speed of the primary motor. This facilitates higher efficiency and better mileage for the combined system, without increasing the maximum power.
3. Single-motor extended – The battery reaches its minimum charge, which triggers the combustion engine. The engine drives the secondary motor as a generator, via the charging electronics, to keep the minimum battery charge level. The primary motor can still provide its 111 kW for short acceleration, albeit not sustained.
4. Dual-motor extended – The electric motors are used again in dual configuration with increased efficiency at higher speeds. Additionally, the gasoline engine contributes propulsion power via the planetary gear. While power is drained from the battery the amount is less than in mode 2 for the same propulsion power, thus extending the range.

To ensure the battery pack would last 10 years and 150,000 miles (240,000 km) expected for the battery warranty, the Volt team decided to use only half of the 16 kWh capacity to reduce the rate of capacity degradation, limiting the state of charge (SOC) up to 80% of capacity and never depleting the battery below 30%.[46][47]GM also expected the battery to withstand 5,000 full discharges without losing more than 10% of its charge capacity.

small pack and only 50% soc available and overly complex (imo) planetary gear hydraulic clutch mechanism for multiplexing power sources.

the ICE module will simply not operate in as high efficiency regime when generating variable power for driving as compared to a properly designed equivalent generator. maybe i’m misguided but maybe a HVDC capacitor could be the buffer. or a modestly sized LTO pack, those are supposed to shine in the heat and cold.

by decoupling the ICE module from traction mechanically, more efficient fuel use could probably be achieved. maybe there’s also a cultural aspect of people expecting the boom boom engine to go yabba dabba doo directly to the wheels or it’s no good ?‍

some random thoughts about vehicle trade offs

electric is great for efficiency and responsive power

 

[curiouscarbon]

i wonder if any generators or cars electrically/resistively/heat pump preheat the catalyst material to operating temperature immediately as compared to waiting for combustion products to directly heat up the catalyst material

 

[upnorthandpersonal]

There is also Nio which offers battery swap. They're currently building the infrastructure for this in Noway and other countries. This coupled with their Battery as a Service model means there will be a lower up-front cost among other things.